Impact of Inflammation and Nutritional Status on Low-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome Outcomes

Recent research has established a significant link between inflammatory status, nutritional health, and the prognosis of patients diagnosed with low-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). A study published in the Journal of Clinical Medicine examined how factors like inflammation and nutrition can affect survival rates in these patients.

The study, led by a team from Bursa Uludag University in Turkey, involved a retrospective analysis of 175 patients who were newly diagnosed with low-risk MDS. The researchers focused on evaluating how various markers of inflammation, nutritional status, and oxidative stress correlated with patient outcomes at the time of diagnosis.

Key findings revealed that both the Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) and the systemic oxidative stress (SOS) score were independently associated with poorer prognoses. Specifically, a lower PNI and a higher SOS score indicated a significantly increased risk of mortality. The study identified an optimal PNI cutoff value of 47.47 for assessing patient risk. Among the participants, 92 patients recorded a low PNI, while 83 exhibited a high PNI. This differentiation led to a stark contrast in median overall survival rates--45.5 months for the low PNI group compared to 75.1 months for their higher PNI counterparts.

Furthermore, the analysis uncovered that while PNI levels correlated with overall survival, there was no significant link between PNI and the progression to acute myeloid leukemia. Additional factors influencing prognosis included a high Revised International Prognostic Scoring System score, advanced age, male gender, and the transformation of MDS to acute myeloid leukemia.

The implications of these findings suggest that nutritional and inflammatory markers could serve as valuable prognostic tools in managing low-risk MDS. The authors of the study propose that incorporating anti-inflammatory or antioxidant therapies might help slow disease progression in affected patients. They have called for more extensive, multicenter trials to validate these results and evaluate their potential integration into standard clinical practices.